Let us conclude our book with two words the Prophet (S.) had said wisely as evidence to prove the aberration of those deviants in order to warn people from them.
The first word concerned Abu Hurayra, ar-Rahhal bin Unfuwa and al-Furat bin Hayyan. Once when they went out from the Prophet (S.) meeting, he said referring to them: “The thirst of one of you in Hell is greater than the other’s. He has a perfidious mind.”1
Abu Hurayra and al-Furat often said after that2 that they didn’t feel safe until ar-Rahhal renegaded and was killed with Musaylama the Liar.
As if they (Abu Hurayra and al-Furat) tried to interpret the Prophet’s (S.) saying to refer to one of them only as ar-Rahhal renegaded and joined Musaylama after the death of the Prophet (S.).
They confused the truth of the Prophet’s (S.) saying when he generalized. It was like the sayings of Allah (S.w.T.):
(Does one of you like that he should have a garden of palms and vines) Baqara 2:266,
(one of them loves that he should be granted a life of a thousand years) Baqara 2:96,
(And when one of them is given news of that of which he sets up as a likeness for the Beneficent God) Zukhruf 43:17,
(And when a daughter is announced to one of them his face becomes black and he is full of wrath) Nahl 16:58
and many other examples in the Qur’an, the Sunna and the speech of the Arabs. The Arabs said in their praise: (The hand of one of them rains with gold. The heart of one of them overflows with compassion) and they said in their dispraise: (The face of one of them is a symbol of impudence. The heart of one of them is harder than the rocks). So the Prophet’s (S.) saying didn’t concern a certain one of the two (Abu Hurayra and al Furat) but it concerned all three. This was the fact of the tradition.
If the Prophet (S.) wanted to refer to a certain one of those three, he would show that clearly by mentioning his name or a distinguishing aspect and wouldn’t say a confused tradition, which was not possible for the Prophet (S.), because the innocent ones would be wronged. So if it was known that one of them was perfidious and he would be in Hell without knowing exactly who he was, the three of them would participate in the verdict. After that it was not to trust or depend upon their sayings or witnesses and not to entrust them with any of the Muslims’ affairs. They would be forbidden from the civil rights in Islam and the umma had to avoid them in whatever concerned truthfulness and fairness according to the Islamic rule about suspicions. That was enough evidence to renounce the three of them.
Definitely the Prophet (S.) would define the perfidious one, who would be in Hell, and wouldn’t let the innocent ones suffer his prediction as long as they lived besides the bad thought of people about them. Certainly he wouldn’t do that, unless the three of them were the same.
If you say: the Prophet (S.) might refer to ar-Rahhal by saying something or pointing to him and that was unknown to us.
We say: if there was something of that, it would not be unknown for Abu Hurayra and al-Furat, who didn’t find anything to make them feel safe except when ar-Rahhal renegaded then they prostrated to thank Allah (S.w.T.). After that they often said that they hadn’t felt safe until ar-Rahal did so.3
If you say: the Prophet (S.) said that in general before ar-Rahhal renegaded and joined Musaylama the Liar and was killed with him. Hence, after ar-Rahhal did so, it became clear that he himself, whom the Prophet (S.) did mean by his tradition without the other two.
We say first: it was understood from the Prophet’s (S.) saying: “..one of you..” that it referred to the all without exception as we explained before and quoted some similar examples from the holy Qur’an. It had nothing to do with the renegade of ar-Rahhal for he was bad before that. So were his two friends.
Second: it was impossible for the prophets (a.s.) to hide the truth when it was required or to delay it until its time elapsed. The time in this case related to the same moment of uttering this word by the Prophet (S.). If anyone of these three deserved any respect or regard, the Prophet (S.) would declare the perfidious one of them by the name. In fact since they became Muslims, they were suspected of their traditions, witnesses and everything else. If it was not necessary to renounce the three of them, the Prophet (S.) would show the name of one of them before he died. He would not leave the matter for the renegade of ar-Rahhal to explain his tradition!
Third: al-Furat bin Hayyan was a spy for the polytheist and an eye for Abu Sufyan to spy on the Prophet (S.) and the Muslims. When the Muslims wanted to kill him according to the Prophet’s (S.) order, he declared to be a Muslim in order to spare his life. The Prophet (S.) said:4 “There are some of you, I gift them to remain Muslims. One of them is al-Furat bin Hayyan.” So he was as bad as ar-Rahhal. Then how could we decide that the Prophet (S.) referred in his tradition to ar-Rahhal and not to al-Furat, who became a Muslim just to spare his life or Abu Hurayra, who had booked his ticket to Hell before his two friends according to the Prophet (S.) saying: “Whoever ascribes a fabricated tradition to me, is to occupy his seat in Hell.”
The second word concerned Abu Hurayra, Samara bin Jundub al-Fazari and Abu Mahthoora al-Jumahi, whom the Prophet (S.) warned one day by saying: “The last of you to die will be in Hell.”5
It was a wise method of the Prophet (S.) to discard the polytheists from participating in the Muslims’ affairs. Since the Prophet (S.) knew the hidden reality of those three men, so he wanted to infuse into the minds of his umma the doubt about them to avoid them in order not to entrust any one of them with a task that had to be done by a trusty believer.
He said that one of them, who was to die the last, would be in Hell without defining a certain one of the three of them. Days and nights elapsed and the tradition remained as it was without any definition or addition until the Prophet (S.) joined his Exalted Lover in the best world. Then the umma had to discard them all from any position concerning the believers and to prevent them the rights according to the traditional and rational rule about suspicions. If the three were not the same in this matter, the Prophet (S.) definitely would define one of them.
If you say: there might be a definition about one of them but it became unknown for us because of the long period.
We say: if it was so, not all of those three would be so afraid from this warning.6
There was no any difference in this matter if there was no definition or it became unknown. All the three men shared the same verdict of the Prophet (S.); therefore it had to be applied to anyone of them.
If you say: the Prophet (S.) said that in general before the first and the second died. After their death it became clear that he, who remained after them, was the intended one to be in Hell. So there was no any problem.
We say first: you knew well as we had said before that it was impossible for the prophets to hide the truth when it was required or to delay it until its time elapsed. You knew, too, that its time was related to the same moment of uttering this warning. If one of these three men was virtuous or regardable, the Prophet (S.) would show that by defining one of them in order not to wrong the other innocent ones. The Prophet (S.) was far away from preventing someone his right or disgracing someone, who was innocent and didn’t deserve to be disgraced and to remain disgraced until he died without knowing his innocence except if he died, according to this null supposition, before his two friends.
Second: we, by Allah (S.w.T.), tried our best in researching and inspecting to know who was the last of them in dying but we couldn’t because the sayings about the dates of their deaths were confused and contradicted.7
Third: the great characters and the high morals of the Prophet (S.), who (became grievous when the believers fell into distress, excessively solicitous about them and had compassion on them)8, would not face those, whom he respected, with this severe saying (the last of you to die will be in Hell). It was not possible for him, who had the sublime morality, to overtake someone innocent and didn’t deserve to be overtaken by such severe saying (the great thirst of one of you in Hell.). If one of these three men (or those) was good, the Prophet (S.) would not include him in this hard surprise and cruel defiance, but the revelation obliged him to do so for the sake of Allah (S.w.T.) and the umma because
(Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed) 53:3.
It was enough for Abu Hurayra to be in his disgrace, which the prophetic traditions put him in. Let you yourself decide when you see the crimes committed by Samara; his horrible excessiveness in shedding the Muslims’ bloods,9 selling wine publicly,10 doing wrong to al-Ansari, disobeying the Prophet (S.) when he invited him to reconcile between him and a man in a case happened between them about Samara’s date-palm, which was inside the house of that man. The Prophet (S.) promised him to have one in Paradise instead of that but he refused in a way showing that he wasn’t faithful.11 Once he wounded the head of the Prophet’s (S.) she-camel disdainfully and scornfully, besides his many other bad deeds.
As for Abu Mahthoora, he was one of the freed captives and one of those, whom the Prophet (S.) gifted to attract them to Islam in order to be safe from their plots against the Muslims. He became a Muslim after the Prophet (S.) had conquered Mecca and after he had come back from the Battle of Hunayn victoriously against the big tribe of Hawazin. At that time no one was more hated to Abu Mahthoora than the Prophet (S.) and his orders.
He often mocked at the Prophet’s (S.) caller, who announced azan, and imitated him loudly in ridiculous manner. But the purse of silver, which the Prophet (S.) used to give him, and the booties of Hunayn, which the Prophet (S.) granted to the freed captives of his enemies, who fought against him and his great morals that embraced whomever declared the shahada, with his severity towards those, who didn’t declare it, all that made the Arabs became Muslims group by group. And so Abu Mahthoora and his likes were obliged unwillingly to become Muslims. He didn’t immigrate to Medina until he died in Mecca.12 Allah (S.w.T.) knew well this man’s hidden intentions!
One word remained that was said by ibn Abdul Birr about this warning concerning these three men. He said in his book al-Istee’ab about Samara bin Jundub: “He died in Basra during the reign of Mu’awiya in fifty-eight of hijra. He fell into a pot full of hot water, which he was to sit on as treatment because he suffered from bad tetanus, and died. That confirmed the Prophet’s (S.) saying to him, Abu Hurayra and to a third one with them: “The last of you to die will be in (fire) Hell.”
It was an odd interpretation, which the text didn’t mean. No one understood it in this way even the three men, who were meant by this tradition, didn’t doubt about its meaning, therefore each of them wished, as it was mentioned by the historians, to die before his two friends. It was not certain that Samara died after the other two. Ibn Abdul Birr said that he died in fifty-eight of hijra whereas Abu Hurayra, according to the sayings of al-Waqidi, ibn Numayr, ibn Obayd, ibnul-Atheer and others, died in fifty-nine, in which Abu Mahthoora died too. It was also said that Abu Mahthoora died in seventy-nine. Ibnul-Kalbi said that Abu Mahthoora died after Samara. So the justification of ibn Abdul Birr about this tradition was but nonsense.
This was the last of what we wanted to say in order to clarify the holy Sunna from the disgraceful defects ascribed to the essence of Islam and its high soul. Thanks to Allah (S.w.T.), who made us succeed to do this simple work, which we pray Allah (S.w.T.) to be of use for the believers and to make it as relic in the day of Resurrection.
Allah (S.w.T.)’s blessing and peace be upon the master and the last of the prophets, his progeny and his auspicious companions.
This book was completed in Soor13 on Thursday, twenty-three of Ramadan, 1362 AH, corresponding to twenty-three of September, 1943, by the author, who looks forward to the mercy of Allah (S.w.T.), Abdul Hussayn bin14 the sharif Yousuf bin the sharif Jawad bin the sharif Isma’eel bin Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Sharafuddeen, whose name was Ibrahim, bin Zein al-Aabideen bin Ali Nooruddeen bin Nooruddeen Ali bin Izziddeen al-Hussayn bin Muhammad bin al-Hussayn bin Ali bin Muhammad bin Tajuddeen, who was famous as Abul Hasan bin Muhammad, whose surname was Shamsuddeen, bin Abdullah, whose surname was Jalaluddeen, bin Ahmed bin Hamza bin Sa’dullah bin Hamza bin Abus-Sa’adat Muhammad bin Abu Muhammad Abdullah, the head of the chiefs of the Talibites15 in Baghdad, bin Abul Harth Muhammad bin Abul Hasan Ali, who was famous as ibnud Daylamiyya, bin Abi Tahir Abdullah bin Abil Hasan Muhammad al-Muhaddith bin Abit Tayyib Tahir bin al-Hassan al-Qat’ei bin Musa Abi Sibha bin Ibrahim al-Murtadha bin Imam al-Kadhim bin Imam as-Sadiq bin Imam al-Baqir bin Imam Zeinul Aabideen bin Imam Abi Abdullah al-Hussayn, the Master of the martyrs, the grandson of the Prophet (S.) and the son of Amirul Mu’mineen, the master of the guardians, Ali bin Abu Talib. Allah (S.w.T.)’s blessing and peace be upon the Prophet (S.) and all of his progeny.